Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1887-05-18
FROM LONDON.
The Debate on the Coercion Bill Re.
sumed in the House Of Commons-Sir
William Vernon Harcourt Moves that
His Amendment be Passed.

LONDON, May IL.
The debate an the coercion bill was re-
sumed this evening.
Sir William Vernon Harcour, moved ,hs,
the amendment exempting from searet inqui.
ry all proceedings relating to public meetings
tor sgrarian movements, including combina-
tlons TO obtain a reductian of rent.
He said that if the government were con.
tent to direct inquiries authorized under the
BILL TO such offences as murder, arson, moon.
lighting. and mutilation of cattle, the bill
might pass.
The bill would then deal with the sctual
crimes and would not be bill creating Of
fences.
10 its present form the bill might apply to
matters never befor recognized az elements
of incrimination. The House ought not to
allow the measure TO pass for the purpose of
repressing crime, when really had another
object.
What was the governments intention?
Did they propose to suppress the combina-
ton against landlords? Was a breach of
contract to be made in criminal offences?
Would the government give to the Irish ten.
ants the same assurances of protection as was
given to the lsborers in England? loud
cheers.)
Would they make it clear that the tenants
right of combining with regard 10 la d, the
cultivation of which was their industry, would
be placed upon the same footing with the
rights of English workmen with regard 10
their labor?
If there was a land trades union in Ireland
would the bill suppress il? If so, on what
ground did the government distinguish be-
tween the Irish trades union and the English
trades unions?
Balfour, chief secretary for Ireland, held
the offences embraced in the measure had
been sufficiently defined, and that the amend
ment if adopted would simply render the bill
futile, leaving out nearly all the agrarian
offences. He said the comparison of the
trade union with Irish conspiracy to paw no
rent was obviously absurd. The law of con-
spiracy regarding wages had a distinct his
tory from whatwas now occurring in Ireland.
The bill dealt with conspiracy to defraud
landlords, with conspiracy to prevent the
free exercise of private and public rights in
matters of trade and other forms of boycott.
ting. As to the suggestion that the bill
would be allowed to progress if the govern
ment conceded the amendment he would dis
tinctly intimate that the government would
not yield to obstruction anything they re-
fused to argument. (Cheers)
Dillon contended that unless the amend
ment was accepted the government would be
able to imprison everybody who might be po-
litically obnoxious.
The landlords who have not received rents
might swear out information of conspiracy
causing all sorts of persons to be brought up
for bogus inquiry. If they refused to answer
the questions of such persous they might be
imprisoned as long as the governme mt chose.
(Cries of hear, hear.)
Gladstone regretted that the government
fo,1 1a1 tha nc
Irish tenants the same protection afforded the
English workman.
As to boycotting, the government must ex-
plain what it meant by that term.
Was intimidation included or only boycott
ting leading to exclusive dealing? (Hesr.
hear.)
Sir K. E. Webster, attorney general. asked
whether it could be seriously contended there
was any real analogy between the case of q
British workman and an Irish tenant. The
bill solely aimed at the dealing with criminal
conspiracy. 1t is impossible to
give the exact definition of boy
cotting which Gladstone demanded.
1t would surpass the wit of man to define
what the developments of boycotting might
be. but they knew the offence and there was
danger that injustice would be done in sup
pressing it, Vice was at the root of all boy.
cotting combinations. When once an in.
quiry was begun into any one form of boy
cotting, there was no logical halting.
Inquiry must be pursued until all forms OF
evil had been investigated.
Thos O'Connor said the combinations of
landlords to keep rack rents at starvation
point would be permitted, while the combina-
ton of tenants to defeat the extortion wonld
be made a criminal offense. He asked if
there was the slightest chance that the meas
ure would ever be used against the combine
ton of landlords.
The amendment was negatived-242 to $50.